Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 239

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Toward a reliable decomposition of predictive uncertainty in hydrological modeling: Characterizing rainfall errors using conditional simulation

Open access
Renard, Benjamin, Kavetski, Dmitri, Leblois, Etienne, Thyer, Mark, Kuczera, George, Franks, Stewart W.·2011·Water Resources Research

Abstract

This study explores the decomposition of predictive uncertainty in hydrological modeling into its contributing sources. This is pursued by developing data‐based probability models describing uncertainties in rainfall and runoff data and incorporating them into the Bayesian total error analysis methodology (BATEA). A case study based on the Yzeron catchment (France) and the conceptual rainfall‐runoff model GR4J is presented. It exploits a calibration period where dense rain gauge data are available to characterize the uncertainty in the catchment average rainfall using geostatistical conditional simulation. The inclusion of information about rainfall and runoff data uncertainties overcomes ill‐posedness problems and enables simultaneous estimation of forcing and structural errors as part of the Bayesian inference. This yields more reliable predictions than approaches that ignore or lump different sources of uncertainty in a simplistic way (e.g., standard least squares). It is shown that independently derived data quality estimates are needed to decompose the total uncertainty in the runoff predictions into the individual contributions of rainfall, runoff, and structural errors. In this case study, the total predictive uncertainty appears dominated by structural errors. Although further research is needed to interpret and verify this decomposition, it can provide strategic guidance for investments in environmental data collection and/or modeling improvement. More generally, this study demonstrates the power of the Bayesian paradigm to improve the reliability of environmental modeling using independent estimates of sampling and instrumental data uncertainties.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/2011wr010643

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 239

Metadata

Authors
Renard, B., Kavetski, D., Leblois, E., Thyer, M., Kuczera, G., & Franks, S. W.
Venue
Water Resources Research
Published
2011-11
Volume
47
Issue
11
ISSN
  • 0043-1397 (ISSN-L)
  • 1944-7973
OpenAlex
W1493653825
Cited by
239
References
6
FWCI
17.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Toward a reliable decomposition of predictive uncertainty in hydrological modeling: Characterizing rainfall errors using conditional simulation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1029/2011wr010643
The paper
Renard, B., Kavetski, D., Leblois, E., Thyer, M., Kuczera, G., & Franks, S. W. (2011). Toward a reliable decomposition of predictive uncertainty in hydrological modeling: Characterizing rainfall errors using conditional simulation. Water Resources Research. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011wr010643

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.